45114 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 144 / Friday, July 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1The 1984 SIP approval of Rule 431.1 was 

actually for the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD). The Antelope 

Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was 

formed on July 1, 1997 from the SCAQMD. All 

South Coast rules in effect at the time remain in 

effect under the newly formed AVAPCD until such 

time that Antelope Valley amended or rescinded 

the rule. On January 1, 2002, Antelope Valley Air 

Quality Management District replaced the 

AVAPCD. 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: July 8, 2013. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18056 Filed 7–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0508; FRL–9838–3] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley 

Air Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Antelope Valley Air 

Quality Management District 

(AVAQMD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern standards for 

continuous emissions monitoring 

systems and oxides of sulfur (SOX)

emissions. We are approving local rules 

that regulate continuous emissions 

monitoring systems and standards for 

gaseous sulfur emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We 

are taking comments on this proposal 

and plan to follow with a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

August 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0508, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rules 

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules addressed by 

this proposal with the dates that they 

were adopted by the local air agency 

and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

AVAQMD .......... 218 Continuous Emission Monitoring .................................................................. 07/17/12 02/06/13 

AVAQMD .......... 218.1 Continuous Emission Monitoring Performance Specifications ..................... 07/17/12 02/06/13 

AVAQMD .......... 431.1 Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels ................................................................. 08/21/12 04/22/13 

On April 9, 2013 for AVAQMD Rules 

218 and 218.1, and on June 26, 2013 for 

AVAQMD Rule 431.1, EPA determined 

the submittals met the completeness 

criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, 

which must be met before formal EPA 

review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 218 into the SIP on September 2, 

2008 (73 FR 51226). AVAQMD adopted 

revisions to the SIP-approved version on 

July 17, 2012 and CARB submitted them 

to us on February 6, 2013. 

There is no previous version of Rule 

218.1 in the SIP. AVAQMD adopted 

Rule 218.1 on July 17, 2012 and CARB 

submitted it to us on February 6, 2013. 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 431.1 into the SIP on October 19, 

1984 (49 FR 41028).1 AVAQMD adopted 

revisions to Rule 431.1 on August 21, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 144 / Friday, July 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 45115 

2Letter from the California Air Resources Board 

(James Goldstene) to EPA Region 9 (Jared 

Blumenfeld) dated June 20, 2011, Page A24–32. 

2012 and CARB submitted them to us 

on April 22, 2013. 

While we can act on only the most 

recently submitted version of these 

rules, we have reviewed materials 

provided with previous submittals. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) help 

produce ground-level ozone, smog and 

particulate matter, which harm human 

health and the environment. Sulfur 

Dioxide (SO2) exposure is associated 

with adverse respiratory effects and can 

contribute to fine particle pollution. 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) contributes to 

the formation of smog and can also 

harm human health. Section 110(a) of 

the CAA requires States to submit 

regulations that control the primary and 

secondary National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS), which includes 

NOX, SO2, and CO emissions. 

Rule 218 establishes requirements for 

continuous emission monitors of NOX, 

SO2, gaseous sulfur compounds, and 

CO. Rule 218 was amended to better 

define specifications and guidelines for 

continuous emission monitoring 

systems (CEMS), delete obsolete 

language, and clarify administrative 

requirements. The original SIP approved 

rule was separated into an 

administrative portion and a technical 

portion. Rule 218 now contains the 

administrative requirements for CEMS 

and covers applicability, the application 

and approval process for CEMS, and 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for CEMS. The technical 

requirements for CEMS were update and 

form the basis for a new rule, Rule 

218.1. 

Rule 218.1 is a new rule and contains 

requirements for the certification of 

CEMS, the performance specifications of 

CEMS, and the operation and 

maintenance of CEMS. 

Rule 431.1 limits the sulfur content of 

fuels such as landfill gases, sewage 

digester gases, refinery gases and other 

gaseous fuels. 

EPA’s technical support documents 

(TSD) have more information about 

these rules. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). The AVAQMD regulates an ozone 

nonattainment area classified as severe 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

AVAQMD is in attainment for the 1971 

primary CO standard and designated as 

‘‘better than national standard’’ for the 

1971 primary SO2 standard (see 40 CFR 

Part 81.305). 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we use to evaluate enforceability 

requirements consistently include the 

following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,’’ 

EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook). 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule 

Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21, 

2001 (the Little Bluebook). 

3. 40 CFR 60 Appendix B—Performance 

Specifications. 

4. 40 CFR 60 Appendix F—Quality 

Assurance Procedures. 

5. SO2 Guideline Document, EPA 452/R–94– 

008, February 1994. 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe these rules are consistent 

with the relevant policy and guidance 

regarding enforceability and SIP 

relaxations. AVAQMD’s staff report for 

Rule 431.1 estimates there is a 

maximum SOx emissions shortfall of 

approximately 10 pounds per day (∼2 

tons per year) when the locally enforced 

limit of 40 ppm is raised to 250 ppm. 

Since the existing SIP limit is 250 ppm, 

we do not consider this a SIP relaxation. 

AVAQMD also amended the 250 ppm 

sulfur limit in Rule 431.1 for selling 

sewage digester gases. The rule now 

allows two compliance options. The 

first option, a 40 ppm daily average, is 

clearly more stringent than the existing 

250 ppm SIP limit. The second option, 

a 40 ppm monthly average combined 

with a 500 ppm 15-minute average 

allows short term intermittent emissions 

to exceed the existing 250 ppm SIP limit 

for selling sewage digester gas. We do 

not believe this short term 500 ppm 15- 

minute average would adversely impact 

the District’s ability to maintain the SO2

NAAQS for the following reasons: (1) A 

40 ppm monthly average effectively 

limits a facility from emitting 500 ppm 

more than two days per month before it 

will exceed the 40 ppm monthly average 

limit; (2) District staff indicated there 

are two publicly owned treatment works 

and to their knowledge, the sewage 

digester gases are burned or flared (800 

ppm existing SIP limit) and are not sold 

(250 ppm existing SIP limit); and (3) 

AVAQMD is in attainment for the 1971 

primary SO2 NAAQS, and California 

points out that for the 2010 SO2 primary 

standard, ambient air quality monitoring 

in the Mojave Desert Air Basin shows a 

2009 1-hour SO2 design value of 10 ppb, 

well below the 2010 federal standard of 

75 ppb and that there have been no 

violations of the federal 1-hour SO2

standard measured over the last two 

decades, and violations are not expected 

in the future.2 Since AVAQMD is in 

attainment for the SO2 NAAQS, Rule 

431.1 is not a required SIP submittal. 

The TSD has more information on our 

evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Further 

Improve the Rules 

Our comments to draft Rule 431.1 

recommended AVAQMD revisit its Best 

Available Control Technology (BACT) 

analysis at a future date and consider 

cost information and data that may 

become available on carbon adsorption 

technology being tested under an 

experimental research permit in the 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

District. We are including this 

recommendation for the District to 

evaluate the next time AVAQMD 

amends Rule 431.1. We have no 

recommendations for Rules 218 or 

218.1. 

D. Public Comment and Proposed 

Action 

Because EPA believes the submitted 

rules fulfill all relevant requirements, 

we are proposing to fully approve them 

as described in section 110(k)(3) of the 

Act. We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate these rules 

into the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely proposes to approve State law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
45116 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 144 / Friday, July 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Carbon monoxide, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

dioxide. 

Dated: July 12, 2013. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18051 Filed 7–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0868; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2012–0463; FRL–9837–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans and 

Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; Ohio; 

Redesignation of Cleveland-AkronLorain Area to Attainment of the 1997 

Annual Standard and 2006 24-Hour 

Standard for Fine Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the State of Ohio’s requests to 

redesignate the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain 

area (Cleveland Area) to attainment for 

the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS or standards) for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5). EPA’s 

proposed approval involves several 

additional related actions. EPA is 

proposing to determine that the 

Cleveland area has attained the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standards. EPA is proposing to approve, 

as revisions to the Ohio state 

implementation plan (SIP), the state’s 

plans for maintaining the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards in the 

area. EPA is proposing to approve the 

ammonia, Volatile Organic Compound 

(VOC), nitrogen oxide (NOX), direct 

PM2.5, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission 

inventories submitted by the State as 

meeting the comprehensive emissions 

inventory requirement of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). Finally, EPA finds adequate 

and is proposing to approve Ohio’s NOX

and direct PM2.5 Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for 2015 and 

2022 for the Cleveland area. In the 

course of proposing to approve Ohio’s 

request to redesignate the Cleveland 

area, EPA addresses a number of 

additional issues, including the effects 

of two decisions of the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia (D.C. Circuit or Court): The 

Court’s August 21, 2012, decision to 

vacate and remand to EPA the CrossState Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and 

the Court’s January 4, 2013, decision to 

remand to EPA two final rules 

implementing the 1997 PM2.5 standard. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0868 and EPA–R05–OAR– 

2012–0463, by one of the following 

methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand delivery: Doug Aburano, 

Chief, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, 18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 

60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05–OAR–2011– 

0868 and EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0463. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional instructions 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS